UN mandated microchips in ammo???

[JRH6856]

This writer certainly thinks so:

UN Aims to Trace the Transfer of All Guns and Ammo

"What is the International Tracing Instrument (ITI)? This is the description published by the PoA:

"Undertaking effective measures in marking, record-keeping and tracing is vital for curbing the illicit trade and combating the diversion of small arms to unintended users. Although many weapons are marked when produced and some when imported, international cooperation in marking and tracing of small arms is in its infancy."

That means that the UN will not only track the buying, selling, transfer, and trading of small arms, light weapons, and ammunition, but it will continue developing technology that will help trace firearms and ammunition from the factory by way of “readable microchips” implanted at the factory. The UN will literally be able to trace every round and every weapon from factory to end user."​

 

[tipoc]

Most folks have enough issues without making some up.

The article quotes a report made to the UN regarding curbing the illegal trade and diversion of weapons:

"Undertaking effective measures in marking, record-keeping and tracing is vital for curbing the illicit trade and combating the diversion of small arms to unintended users. Although many weapons are marked when produced and some when imported, international cooperation in marking and tracing of small arms is in its infancy."

It says they have very few mechanisms to do this. They have no way of tracking neither all guns and especially no way to track or mark ammo.

The UN can only act when the U.S. agrees. It's hard to get that when the U.S. and China and Russia, the worlds major producers of small arms do not want to curb the sales and international distribution of arms.

So you can worry about some sub committee of some sub agency of a group with no authority. Or you can worry about more immediate things.

tipoc

 

[JRH6856]

I used to not worry about being in Social Security, Medicare, or about discussing firearms designs (ITAR) on the internet, either. Nor was I very concerned that our government would give Iran a green light as a nuclear power and agree to assist it in defense of that power. Now I worry more about a lot things that I never thought would be so immediate and wonder if perhaps more people had started worrying sooner, they might still not be so immediate. YMMV.

 

[Snyper]

I used to not worry about being in Social Security, Medicare, or about discussing firearms designs (ITAR) on the internet, either.

There's no need to worry about those things now.

The internet has a way of blowing things out of proportion, and things get repeated as if they are facts when they really aren't

 

[hso]

While Antis might want to extend this to personal firearms and some of our people want to see monsters under the bed, this effort is not to stop legal trade in personal firearms. Instead its stated and official purpose is to stop weapons getting into the hands of terrorists and rogue nations.

 

[Ryanxia]

While Antis might want to extend this to personal firearms and some of our people want to see monsters under the bed, this effort is not to stop legal trade in personal firearms. Instead its stated and official purpose is to stop weapons getting into the hands of terrorists and rogue nations.

Funny how additional regulation of firearms (and other things) is always done to combat the 'terrorists'. But once those systems are in place, the terrorist is whoever the people in power say is the terrorist.

 

[JRH6856]

There's no need to worry about those things now.

I suppose you're right. It would be much better to wait and worry after they happen and it's too late.

 

[JRH6856]

While Antis might want to extend this to personal firearms and some of our people want to see monsters under the bed, this effort is not to stop legal trade in personal firearms. Instead its stated and official purpose is to stop weapons getting into the hands of terrorists and rogue nations.

From the article:

Within the terms of the PoA and ITT is also found the definition of what kind of weapon or ammunition would be considered “illicit” for purposes of the program. These prohibitions include those weapons, small arms, or ammunitions that:

are transferred in violation of arms embargoes decided by the Security Council in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, or,

not marked in accordance with the provisions of this instrument, or,

manufactured or assembled without a licence or authorization from the competent authority of the State where the manufacture or assembly takes place, or,

transferred without a licence or authorization by a competent national authority.​

But that could never apply to 3D printing or private sales.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Sorry, this sounds too much like the ongoingly claimed and ongoingly proven false claims that a UN treaty is going to make gun ownership illegal. The UN does not mandate US law.

There is no reason to worry about this now. Why? Because the UN talking about it does not make it a reality (it is just a report). The UN talks about a lot of stuff. The UN has plans for a lot of stuff, and have had plans for decades, but coming to fruition is another matter. Once the UN gets its act together and does come up with a treaty or policy, they have a very difficult time implementing and enforcing it.

The United Nations demands that national legislatures (Congress) beef up laws pertaining to the placement of markings and microchips that will enable “appropriate law enforcement channels” to maintain lists of those who possess the small arms and ammunition that must be eradicated.

This is where "the internet" is blowing things out of proportion, explicitly. The UN is not demanding this. The PoA would like to see this done, but the UN isn't demanding it.

The Programme of Action on small arms lacks a framework to support its implementation.

http://www.poa-iss.org/about.aspx

The UNODA has been active for decades. What have they accomplished thusfar?

If you want to worry about things now, worrying won't do you any good. Contact all your federal reps and tell them your concerns. Most won't have a clue as to what you are talking about yet, but go ahead and inform them.

 

[Bigdog57]

Perhaps "Much ado about nothing", to quote Willy Shakespeare. BUT..... I have the guns I need, and the stocks of ammo components sufficient to last the rest of my shooting life, so no worries there. And, making usable gunpowder, even primers, is within the capabilities of any good home enthusiast with a smattering of chemistry skills.
This genie left the bottle long ago. Whatever silly laws and regs the Useless Nations leadership can coerce our goobermint into following can be easily worked around.

 

[Frank Ettin]

Can any of this be confirmed by a reliable source?

 

[JRH6856]

Aside from the banter over whether the UN will try to infringe upon our 2A rights -- or not -- has anyone considered the UN is completly incompetent and posses about the same threat to us as the Keystone Cops posed to Al Capone?

The UN poses no direct threat. The threat is in how our current president interprets the Constitution which he believes allows him to treat UN agreements as law. He is operating from his knowledge of the Constitution (he taught Constitutional law at the University of Chicago) and the theory that as the Chief Magistrate (as described in Federalist #70), the President has the authority to determine the constitutionality of any law created by legislative act or treaty. Initially, this was considered one of the reasons the President has veto power--so he can veto unconstitutional acts of Congress. And while John Marshall also asserted the authority of the Supreme Court in determining constitutionality, this did not remove that authority from the President. Since the three branches are equal, Obama's arguement is that the President has equal authority with SCOTUS for determining constitutionality and being equal, stare decisis would require SCOTUS to give credence to his determinations if they are challenged in court. He has alluded to this authority often and we are seeing him act on it more and more (using his pen and his phone). Opponents charge he is ignoring the COnstitution, but he is actually acting on his interpretation of it.

 

[lemaymiami]

I believe there's already precedent in the explosives industry where chemical markers are included in the manufacturing process to enable investigators to trace the origin of their products if they've been used improperly.

As already noted this sort of stuff would require the kind of international co-operation that we've rarely ever seen....

 

[TimSr]

I used to not worry about being in Social Security, Medicare, or about discussing firearms designs (ITAR) on the internet, either.

Funny how lots of little "common sense" minor intrusions become a major lack of privacy over time and incrementally, and any liberty that is "temporarily" given up is never reconstituted. It's amazing how data bases are cross referenced, and a police officer pulling you over knows your life history from your license plate. You mention social security, and that is the biggest intrusion of all, as it has become a national ID which was never it's intended purpose. Yeah, there's no need to worry today, but tomorrow is a different story.

 

[JRH6856]

"The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt." — John Philpot Curran (1750-1817)

 

[tipoc]

First the author quotes from a report that discusses possible UN efforts to curb illegal sales and distribution of small arms and ammunition. Then he just makes something up...

That means that the UN will not only track the buying, selling, transfer, and trading of small arms, light weapons, and ammunition, but it will continue developing technology that will help trace firearms and ammunition from the factory by way of “readable microchips” implanted at the factory. The UN will literally be able to trace every round and every weapon from factory to end user.

There is a large jump made here, several leaps worthy of an Olympian.

1) The members of the UN Security with veto power are also the worlds largest producers of weapons and ammo. The sale of small arms and ammo are a billion dollar industry in the USA, China and the Russian Fed. This includes the illicit, undercover, and illegal, by international law, sales and distribution of the same. For decades they have all spoke against this and for more years than that they have done next to nothing about it unless their ox was being gored. They have not and will not do anything to substantially curb this.

2) There exists no tech for implanting microchips in bullets. None. Nor in the powder in the case. Nothing like this on the horizon.

3) This is a report from a small sub committee whose most important role so far has been to get paid salaries which enabled a bunch of folks to feed their families. Those fellas plan on feeding their families so they will continue to produce reports saying things are going to heck...just like the author of the quoted article.

I could be concerned about this about like I'm concerned that the UN will send fellas in black helicopters to take my guns. "It could happen" some one will say. "If not now then later" they can add. But fact is this will not happen for the number 1 reason I cited. Just like the UN will not ban the production of oil or coal.

There are many actual things going on that do concern me 2dn A wise.

I'm more concerned about the cities that are, or are trying, to make it legal that before you can buy ammo you have to produce a state ID, have a picture taken and/or give up your fingerprints. All that is being done in the name of "protecting us" from "illegal aliens", felons or the mentally ill.

I'm more concerned about them passing a federal law that puts together a vast bureaucratic agency that cross references all medical files with legal files, with school and job records to make it impossible for a person to buy a gun or ammo if they have been convicted or charged with certain crimes, have a "history" of violence, a criminal record, went to a shrink because they were ded or suicidal suffered from PTSD, etc. etc.

Those are actual today concerns.

Knowing the difference is important.

tipoc

 

[Frank Ettin]

Still no confirmation from a reliable source, so there's no sense wasting time discussing what might well be fantasy.

 

[Frank Ettin]

The OP has sent me by PM links to more reputable sources and primary source material. Therefore, I'm re-opening this thread and will ask him to post those links.

Discussion should be based on the material he will link to in his following post -- not the article linked to in the OP.

I've also deleted a number of noncontributory rants, blather and general drivel. Avoid posting nonsense and keep the discussion productive, objective and evidence based.

 

[JRH6856]

Thanks, Frank.

While it is true that ammunition is not covered by the current PoA, a PoA and ITI for ammunition tracking is under consideration (this is what the article in the OP was referring to and since much of the article was apparently based on interviews by the author, or so he claims, that article is the only extant source for that conent). The last link in the following source list discusses ammunition.

Sources

Text of Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects

Text of UN Arms Trade Treaty (PDF)

Issue Briefs criticizing the PoA from The Heritage Foundation:
The U.S. Should Withdraw from the U.N.'s "Programme of Action" on Small Arms

U.S. Participation in the U.N.’s “Programme of Action” on Small Arms and Light Weapons Is Not in the National Interest

Text of ITI (PDF: International Instrument to Enable States to Identify and Trace,
in a Timely and Reliable Manner, Illicit Small Arms and Light Weapons

Article on considerations for tracing small arms ammuntion from Small Arms Survey. Contains source links for different propoesed tracing methods for ammo. Marking, Record-keeping, and Tracing

A listing of reports on PoA compliance by all countries with links to reports.

I will post more sources as I find them.

 

[orionengnr]

I suppose you're right. It would be much better to wait and worry after they happen and it's too late.

--Hey, down't worry about that green-tip 5.56 ban...it won't affect you.
--Assault weapons ban? Hey, no worries, you are not going to murder anyone, so it doesn't affect you.
--"High capacity" magazine ban? What do you care? An honest citizen doesn't need more than ten rounds...right?
--Chinese ammo? Nah, you don't need any of that Commie crap, right?
--Hey, while we're at it...UN small arms "treaty"...it's okay if the UN dictates to American citizens, what we can or cannot own...right?

If you don't get it yet, move on...you are part of the problem.

Check that...you are the problem.

Subscribing...and I know I'm going to regret it...and probably pick up a few "demerits"...

 

[JRH6856]

SmallArmsSurvey.org Issue Brief on Ammunition Marking (PDF format)

Letter to the Editor, New York Times on the benefits of microchips in powder. (Author seems to think ammunition has a very limited shelf life.)

And this may be the letter that the NYT letter is referring to, though this was posted on The Daily Kos. Suggest microchips in bullets with a smartphone app for tracking so hunters can find lost game easier.

 

[barnbwt]

This is what happens when you engage in foreign adventures and entanglements. We were duly warned, but there was a war on and blah, blah, blah...

Will the blue-helmets come and take all our guns? No. But is every single last other member nation of standing in the organization openly committed to civilian disarmament both inside and outside their borders? You bet-cher sweet bippy. I think it is absolutely not beyond the realm of reason that the UN would try to, and succeed in passing, some sort of broad restriction that greatly impedes legal civilian arms commerce. Because they do not value it, and actively resent it, or just by accident while pursuing 'worthy' goals like preventing arms proliferation among undesirables*

The problem with them passing even a toothless, unenforced measure is that it's still out there. Waiting. Waiting for some future low-life to use its language to justify further restriction under the law.

"I used to not worry about being in Social Security, Medicare, or about discussing firearms designs (ITAR) on the internet, either."

There's no need to worry about those things now.

The internet has a way of blowing things out of proportion, and things get repeated as if they are facts when they really aren't

Thread's right over here, bud. Feel free to weigh in on why the ITAR change is not what I, and ever other person I've found who actually read the proposal sees it as. And do see again what I wrote about the danger of tolerating even unenforced bad gun laws to remain on the books (hey, it only took California 100 years for Kamala Harris to enforce the ban on handgun-advertisements )

TCB

*Much like the connotation applied domestically, international undesirables are often victims of brutal crackdowns and corrupt governments themselves, or simple international bigotry, and the withholding of arms purely politically motivated by allied nations in the UN. For instance; you can bet money on whatever scheme they come up with making it more difficult for Israel to sell their wares abroad, while freeing up the market for the likes of China, Russia, and Brazil, which are/have all engaged in atrocities.

 

[tipoc]

I thank JRH6856 for his efforts:

A reminder, someone thinking about something does not make it so or mean it is on the agenda of any government that could do something about it.

In reverse order:

RFID chips in bullets. Letter to the Daily Kos from March 2013 proposing this. This is a letter from a reader of the paper. It does not count as evidence that the government is planning to do this. These are Radio Frequency Identification tags or chips. For over a decade this idea has been floated by antis, specifically that they be placed in all firearms. Here is more information on them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-frequency_identification

Will the international arms industry allow this to occur? Will you? No it is not a serious threat.

May 38, 2000 Letter to the Editor of the New York Times proposing marked gunpowder. After the Oklahoma bombing Congress passed a bill allowing for fertilizer to be implanted with marker of this type. This proposal literally from some guy who lives in Baltimore is not evidence that the idea has been put into practice and is a direct threat today. In fact the letter writer assumes that the idea is only practical after all weapons are "registered" in the U.S. and that gun owners are only allowed to own certain weapons. We are still a bit away from that reality.

Again a person having an idea and writing a letter to the editor in 2000 about it does not constitute evidence that the U.N. is going to implement that idea in the U.S. on August 1, 2015.

Small Arms Survey Dec. 2011 article on ammunition marking. (Gotta fess up, I didn't read this whole thing. Though I've read things like this for years now and then). Different types of ammunition marking have been proposed in recent years. A few years ago California mandated it. But it has yet to be implemented. Ammo manufacturers have refused to do it. No stamped ammo is sold in California.

It is not news that antis want to implement this and it is currently being fought.

But again, this story is well known and old news. The U.N. is not going to implement international ammo marking this year or any year in the immediate future. Will the Russians agree to this? Will the Chinese? Or the Indians? Will the U.S.?

The cited articles are only evidence that somebody has thought of these things. Not that the U.N. will implement them next month. But we knew that.

tipoc

 

[barnbwt]

"Letter to the Editor, New York Times on the benefits of microchips in powder. (Author seems to think ammunition has a very limited shelf life.)"
Wait, is that guy confusing that whatever-it-was-called 'proposed technology' (you know, fantasy) to make ammunition go dead after five or ten years, and contain trace 'identifying' elements in the bullet & powder that would tie the items back to the owner? It's what was en vogue by anti-gunners lacking basic firearms knowledge before microstamping.

TCB

 

[JRH6856]

"Letter to the Editor, New York Times on the benefits of microchips in powder. (Author seems to think ammunition has a very limited shelf life.)"
Wait, is that guy confusing that whatever-it-was-called 'proposed technology' (you know, fantasy) to make ammunition go dead after five or ten years, and contain trace 'identifying' elements in the bullet & powder that would tie the items back to the owner? It's what was en vogue by anti-gunners lacking basic firearms knowledge before microstamping.

TCB

Yeah, he could be confusing/conflating the two ideas (and I thought it was supposed to be primers that expired in the fantasy, not powders), but the thrust of his letter seems to be that if they can plant RFID chips in powder, that since existing powder has a limited shelf life, within a few years, all usable powder will be chipped and trackable rendering gun registration a moot point. The only reason I included it was because it suggested chipping the powder.